Quadro T500 Mobile vs GeForce MX250

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX250 with Quadro T500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX250
2019
2 GB GDDR5, 10 Watt
6.24

T500 Mobile outperforms MX250 by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking582485
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency43.0534.54
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP108BTU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date20 February 2019 (5 years ago)2 December 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384896
Core clock speed937 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speed1038 MHz1695 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate24.9194.92
Floating-point processing power0.7972 TFLOPS3.037 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs2456

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth48.06 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.2
CUDA6.17.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce MX250 6.24
T500 Mobile 9.01
+44.4%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GeForce MX250 4633
T500 Mobile 7996
+72.6%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GeForce MX250 3660
T500 Mobile 4225
+15.4%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX250 21545
T500 Mobile 23453
+8.9%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GeForce MX250 1103
T500 Mobile 1788
+62.1%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD23
−56.5%
36
+56.5%
1440p10−12
−50%
15
+50%
4K10−12
−70%
17
+70%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Elden Ring 15
−66.7%
24−27
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 17
−70.6%
27−30
+70.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−60%
8
+60%
Forza Horizon 4 29
−24.1%
35−40
+24.1%
Metro Exodus 21
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Valorant 18−20
−68.4%
30−35
+68.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18
−61.1%
27−30
+61.1%
Counter-Strike 2 5
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+100%
6
−100%
Dota 2 40
−125%
90
+125%
Elden Ring 11
−127%
24−27
+127%
Far Cry 5 40
+42.9%
28
−42.9%
Fortnite 35−40
−43.2%
50−55
+43.2%
Forza Horizon 4 22
−63.6%
35−40
+63.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 28
−10.7%
31
+10.7%
Metro Exodus 12
−100%
24−27
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 76
+7%
70−75
−7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8
−200%
24−27
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−40%
28
+40%
Valorant 14
−129%
30−35
+129%
World of Tanks 95−100
−35.7%
130−140
+35.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 13
−123%
27−30
+123%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+140%
5
−140%
Dota 2 57
−31.6%
75
+31.6%
Far Cry 5 29
+7.4%
27
−7.4%
Forza Horizon 4 16
−125%
35−40
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
−39.2%
70−75
+39.2%
Valorant 18−20
−42.1%
27−30
+42.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Elden Ring 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
−117%
13
+117%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
World of Tanks 45−50
−33.3%
60−65
+33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−70%
16−18
+70%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−46.2%
18−20
+46.2%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−72.7%
18−20
+72.7%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Valorant 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−41.2%
24−27
+41.2%
Elden Ring 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+21.4%
14
−21.4%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−11.8%
18−20
+11.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
−64.7%
28
+64.7%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Fortnite 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%
Valorant 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how GeForce MX250 and T500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T500 Mobile is 57% faster in 1080p
  • T500 Mobile is 50% faster in 1440p
  • T500 Mobile is 70% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX250 is 140% faster.
  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the T500 Mobile is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce MX250 is ahead in 7 tests (12%)
  • T500 Mobile is ahead in 36 tests (63%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (25%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.24 9.01
Recency 20 February 2019 2 December 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 18 Watt

GeForce MX250 has 80% lower power consumption.

T500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 44.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX250 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX250 is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GeForce MX250
NVIDIA Quadro T500 Mobile
Quadro T500 Mobile

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 1572 votes

Rate GeForce MX250 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 107 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.